They mistyped it there, it's actually a 1e100.net Which is a reference to 1e100 (1 x 10) or a "googol", the name of which google is derived.

"The vulnerability requires that an attacker knows the name of the file they want to access, according to the company." Fat lot of good that does, all the files that are important to your *system* are all named the same on any Win computer, they could do some serious damage that way. Not to mention they could use those files to easily find every file on your computer due to indexing.

I never understood what people thought was so ugly about the UI. What's so bad about it and what should be changed?

Note that the five year old will probably have it easier to learn it, she's not shifted from a solid working and accustomed UI to a backwards peace of crap. She'll be more open to it and need less functions.

Just another virtual world.

I was told that I could listen to the radio at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven, I told Bill that if Sandra is going to listen to her headphones while she's filing then I should be able to listen to the radio while I'm collating so I don't see why I should have to turn down the radio because I enjoy listening at a reasonable volume from nine to eleven.

People have been asking for a universal binary or some sort of Universal Package Manager (UPM, that could work) for linux for ages. I think the main reason why there isn't one yet is the FLOSS nature of Linux. When the source code is open, there is no need for one single binary, it's up to the distro (or user) to make it into an fitting binary package. For that reason I think it wont change much if there was one single Binary. Also I've always thought that more applications should just use .bin files, compatible for all.

Cops are people too and so are mafia and all the rest of that kind of gangsters. She posted their home adress, names and street view pictures and habits on her blog. It would annoy me but I would not Lock her in Cage or anything for it, do you want all paparazi and press to be locked up by a violent gang too?

NO! NO! NO! Why sacrifice a leg to the Beast in Blue for them to protect a finger!? I will never allow criminals to invade my life, therefore I will not give the cops or any monopoly on violence (as the mafia, Ooh how very similar they are) or anyone to gain more power then anyone else. I have no problem with an individual peeking in, because they are just an individual and if they get too bad I will look after myself or get other voluantary sources of security. But I will never give away my privacy or security to one violent group who demands it from me, they will always be worse then one single nuisance.

I have to agree with, sure it'll be annoying if you did, but I prefer it to being bullied around by the gang in blue. And if my job is a public one, I can kind of expect this kind of stuff. They didn't arrest her for taking photos, etc. Else all paparazi and press would be jailed, they are probably even worse. She's just a scapegoat for these badge wearing assholes to make a example out of and reafirm there "untouchable" status and violent coercion.